Some interesting responses and after a small delay to allow 'high spirits' to decline. I will comment. Of course you can disagree, that is what forums are for. Me gads if we all agreed it would be none realistic and pretty bland.
On a full lock there simply should be no binding at all. It is not beyond even the most inexperienced user to 'feel' a tightness - often described as 'feeling if the brakes are binding slightly' - or more in some cases.
There is nothing VCU in relation to potential damage that cannot be tested in the full lock test.
The results are pretty meaningless of the so called OWUT. An excessively tight VCU will also be felt through the 'manoeuvring on full lock' test' - so nothing gained.
There is no difference between an auto and a manual as far as a simple feeling of tightening on lock.
To add more things into the pot... Yes, I can understand that many think that the OWUT is in some way indicative of a 'good' or 'bad' VCU. - to a certain extent it will show a greater viscosity due to increased time. Is this an issue though ? - and the answer is.
...... - possibly
- that is all. If, when tested in a moving situation (lock!
there is evidence of tightness, then the VCU is at end of life and needs replacing
.
All this boils down to is that it is
far far far simpler to test the condition of the VCU in respect of 'potential for damage to transmission' by simply driving the vehicle forward and reverse on lock. It takes seconds, it can be done by anyone who is capable of actually doing the OWUT.
Torque on a VCU that is subject to issues is definitely - utterly - NOT linear. What happens in a slow motion test with the vehicle static is not indicative of what happens when moving. Take for example the 30x weight fluid in a vcu fitted by some - there is absolutely no way in hell that this will work effectively off road, however, it may show a 'reasonable' result in a OWUT. - this indicates that the test is not appropriate in the terms of torque linearity. A 'good range' test in a static environment does not a good VCU make. In the same way, a longer period to turn than reported by people performing this test is also non indicative of issues If the test made on lock is fine, then even with a 'long time' on the OWUT the VCU is absolutely fine.
A VCU that shows tightness on LOCK is due to be changed. A VCU that shows 'tightness on the OWUT is only of importance IF it also shows the tightness on the LOCK test. - too different things... and important ! - a classic case of where the static test fails. Also by simple math - The OWUT has to be backed up by the lock test to show a meaningful result, Hence remove the first non definitive part and you are left with the second.
We also seem to have people here who think that the expert re-conditioners of such units are in some way 'not happy about the forum no.1 sticky' due to some form of jealousy -
... this is getting into the conspiracy theory and tin foil hat stuff.....
It boils down to the simple
fact that to drive the vehicle forward and reverse on full lock and feel for tightness / binding is
FAR easier to do and is also definitive.... (once brake binding issues are ruled out) - but - that would also apply to the static test.
Simplicity and accuracy is the thing. It has been proven that the 'times' on the OWUT do not mean much at all. One does not have to make a guess of 'how tight' it feels on lock.. it is simply the issue that if it FEELS TIGHTER - as if the brakes were binding - then you have an issue.
Occam's razor.
If you disagree, then great. No worries. It is absolutely your prerogative. I hold no grudges.
It is though often difficult for folks to move on to something far more logical and far easier.
IMO this is a classic example of such a case. There seems to be an 'attitude' of illogical perspective in relationship to this issue. Each to their own.
I will turn off the light when I head home .
Joe